The Great Debate: THE STORYTELLING OF SCIENCE (OFFICIAL) – Parts 1 & 2

The Great Debate: THE STORYTELLING OF SCIENCE (OFFICIAL) – Parts 1 & 2

The Origins Project at ASU presents the final night in the Origins Stories weekend, focusing on the science of storytelling and the storytelling of science. The Storytelling of Science features a panel of esteemed scientists, public intellectuals, and award-winning writers including well-known science educator Bill Nye, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, theoretical physicist Brian Greene, Science Friday's Ira Flatow, popular science fiction writer Neal Stephenson, executive director of the World Science Festival Tracy Day, and Origins Project director Lawrence Krauss as they discuss the stories behind cutting edge science from the origin of the universe to a discussion of exciting technologies that will change our future. They demonstrate how to convey the excitement of science and the importance helping promote a public understanding of science.

Video by Black Chalk Productions

Get the most recent updates from the Origins Project by following us on Facebook /ASUOriginsProject and Twitter @asuORIGINS. Contact [email protected] with questions.

My second semester calculus teacher also taught basic geometry and had me tell that class these same words. A little algebra can get you out of sticky situations, at least mathematical situations, every time.

I’ll stick my neck out. These clever people, these politically aware and socially sound scientists have already taken this secular community to a new level in having these open-to-audience discussions. I like to think that what we are witnessing here is the eruption of Secular Government in action. A new style of government altogether, open and public with point and counter-point (and value-added point!) open and clear to all because it CAN BE open and clear to all for the reason it is genuinely ‘secular’, and so in the best interests of ALL. If in 5-10 yrs from now, these panels are how we ‘do’ government, I’ll finally rest easy. Thank you panel members for being the first to demonstrate the model for secular governance..

In debates about the existence of god, both sides throw out arguments they think will be be difficult for the other side to refute. The argument might not even matter to them personally. I would like to see a debate where each side presented the most compelling reason for them personally to hold their position. Then the other side confines its remarks to trying to demolish that one argument. Both sides reveal their primary reason ahead of time. Presumably then, it is actually possible you may see someone shift positions as a result of the debate. Further both sides would confine their comments to the same material rather than each wandering off in completely different directions and never properly crossing swords.